Friday, March 14, 2014

The Pros and Cons of hunting with an atlatl versus hunting with the bow and arrow Or why was the bow and arrow invented in the Old World 15,000 years ago but was not being used in the New World until a 1000 years ago?

“A” is for arrow head and atlatl. This
week we are going to briefly compare atlatl or spear thrower technology with
archery technology. In Europe, Asia and Africa based on cave paintings and the
reduced size of spear points, the bow and arrow replaces the atlatl between 12,000
and 15,000 years ago. In eastern North America, based on the widespread use of
small triangular projectile points known ethnographically to be arrow points, it
is generally agreed that archery technology doesn’t appear until the Late
Woodland or Late Prehistoric period, at approximately 1000 AD. The obvious
question is why did it take so long? If the bow and arrow is such a great
invention, it should have come over with the first migration of Paleoindians or
at least shortly thereafter. However, maybe archaeologists are wrong in their
assumption about triangular points representing the first appearance of the bow
and arrow and there are older arrow points,
dating to the Archaic or even Paleoindian period (10,000 - 11,200 B.P.), that were being
used on arrows that aren’t recognized as such.

The problem with determining the use of the
bow and arrow (or the atlatl for that matter) is that almost all of the
components are made from perishable (organic) materials and are very rarely
found in the archaeological record. The stone point is all that is left. Over
the past decade, archaeologists have been examining the dating of the archery
system in the New World. Much of this work is experimental, using bow and arrow
and atlatl replicas to determine the characteristics of each. It turns out that
both systems have their advantages and disadvantages.

Spear
thrower technological system - consists of a wooden
spear thrower and an arrow-like dart, one to three meters in length with
fletching or feathers for stability in flight. The use of the atlatl dates to
at least 25,000 years ago and probably tens of thousands of years earlier. It
requires considerable skill but it clearly represents an improvement over the
hand held spear. The dart can be propelled up to 50 meters although there is a
reduction in accuracy beyond 27 m (Hutchings and Bruchert 1997:892). This has advantages while stalking animals but
it also provides protection for the thrower from the animal or in warfare, the
enemy. The speed varies between 20 m/s and 30 m/s (Tomka 2013: 563). Because of
its weight, “the kinetic energy and momentum of a dart at impact tends to be
relatively high” (Tomka 2013:562). Therefore, it is particularly effective
against large (bison) and medium (deer) size prey. Compared to the bow and
arrow, the atlatl could be used with one hand and it was not affected by
moisture as much as the bow and arrow. However, it is more difficult to use in
a dense forested environment than in a more open setting.

Archery
technological system - consists of a bow constructed of one
to three pieces of wood and a fletched arrow. The effective killing distance on
medium size prey using a typical Indian bow is 45 meters (Tomka 2013: 562) and
this is almost twice as effective as the atlatl. The speed of an arrow is
almost twice as fast as that of an atlatl dart (Tomka 2013: 563). It works well
in a woodland environment and it could be used while moving compared to the
stationary stance required of the atlatl (Railey 2010:263). The increased speed
of the arrow improved accuracy and penetrating power making it a somewhat more
lethal system on small to medium sized animals (deer), but not large animals.
In addition, the speed reduced the time prey had to escape.

In general, the spear thrower is
more effective in somewhat open settings and against large animals that are
slow to respond to attack. Archery is most effective on medium to small
animals, especially in forested settings.

Recently, archaeologists (see the
additional reading list) have been measuring projectile points in order to
identify changes in size to identify the appearance of the bow and arrow
archaeological contexts. Unfortunately, the results have not been conclusive so
the timing of bow and arrow technology remains unclear. Based on performance
characteristics, its introduction into the New World probably depended on
regional conditions along with cultural factors. During Paleoindian times, the
atlatl may have been the preferred hunting weapon in the open forest of the
Late Pleistocene era (11,700 years ago). In contrast, bow and arrow technology may have
replaced the atlatl during the Archaic period when hunting deer and elk in the
closed forest of the eastern woodlands. However, in the Great Plains of the
American West, the atlatl would have been very effective in hunting large
animals such as elk and bison and it may have been used until very late in
prehistory.

We hope you have enjoyed this week’s
blog. It highlights a significant but poorly understood technological
transition in North America. It also highlights the fact that the
archaeological record can be very challenging even when dealing with
significant cultural changes. This blog is based on a research paper being
prepared by Pochereth Payne who is working on her senior thesis at Mercyhurst
College in Erie. She conducted research in our lab in August of 2013. This
represents another example of the opportunities the State Museum has to offer
to students that will enhance their educational experience and professional
careers.

Additional reading

Hamm,
Jim

1991 Bows and Arrows of the
Native Americans: A Step-by-Step Guide to Wooden Bows.Guilford:
The Lyons Press.

Hildebrandt,
William R., Jerome H. King

2012 Distinguishing Between Darts and Arrows in
the Archaeological Record: Implications for Technological
Change in the American West. American
Antiquity 77(4):789-799.

2 comments:

I disagree with the concept that the bow and arrow replaced the atlatl at a particular point in time. There were cultures that used both until after European contact such as the Aztecs. There are several other examples of the dual use of the bow and arrow and atlatl. It is more likely that the demise of atlatl use occurred shortly after contact with the use of trade materials like metal arrowheads and fishhooks. (Atlatls are very effective for fishing.)

One Tank Trip

WFMZ-TV 69 from Reading, Pennsylvania visited The State Museum of Pennsylvania on February 8th, 2017. Karin Mallett prepared a feature piece on great places to visit that are one tank of gas from Reading and our gallery was the focus of this visit. Karin interviewed Kurt Carr, Senior Curator and Janet Johnson in the gallery and provide a nice overview of the spectacular exhibits. Please click on the link below and enjoy this glimpse of the museum during this One Tank Trip!
One Tank Trip: Hall of Anthropology and Archaeology

Followers

Disclaimer:

The views contained within do not necessarily reflect those of the Pennsylvania Historical and Museum Commission (PHMC) as a whole, nor the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania.Comments and discussion are encouraged. However, posts that are deemed inappropriate or offensive will be removed. Users will not be notified when content is removed.